The creation and storage of digitized data has proliferated in recent years. Accordingly, various storage systems that facilitate efficient and cost effective storage of large amounts of digital data are common today. For example, a cluster network environment of nodes may be implemented as a data storage system to facilitate the creation, storage, retrieval, and/or processing of digital data. Such a data storage system may be implemented using a variety of storage architectures, such as a network-attached storage (NAS) environment, a storage area network (SAN), a direct-attached storage environment, and combinations thereof. The foregoing data storage systems may comprise one or more data storage devices configured to store digital data within data volumes. Accordingly, in such a cluster network environment various cluster and node components interact to provide storage services to clients.
As can be appreciated from the foregoing, storage systems may comprise relatively complex infrastructure implementing a plurality of components which interact to provide desired storage services. Accordingly, various tools have been developed for use in managing and/or monitoring such storage systems.
For example, a storage administrator may utilize an application, such as may be executed on a management console of the storage system, to interact with the storage system and components thereof to provide report generation, configuration, and control. Representative examples of such management applications include DFM OPERATIONS MANAGER available from NetApp, Inc. and STORAGE ESSENTIALS available from Hewlett-Packard Company. Although providing useful front-end (e.g., service or user side) reporting and control interfaces, such management applications are essentially user interfaces which allow a storage administrator or other user to obtain information regarding the operation of the storage system and to directly manipulate or change various settings as desired. Management applications available today do not facilitate back-end (e.g., infrastructure or manufacturer side) automated support capabilities.
As another example of a tool developed for use in managing and/or monitoring storage systems, back-end automated support (ASUP) functionality, such as NETAPP AUTOMATED SUPPORT available from NetApp, Inc., has been implemented with respect to some storage systems. Such ASUP functionality traditionally provides a call-home type automated support system in which a storage system issues messages as a monitored event occurs. The messages typically include raw (i.e., natively available within the monitored system, without analysis, aggregation, etc.) information from the monitored system regarding the particular monitored event. Such messages are provided in a unidirectional communication link (i.e., outbound only from the storage system) to an ASUP back-end system (e.g., ASUP back-end server) where the data is collected in a flat file. Back-end support personnel, such as support representatives of the equipment manufacturer or infrastructure provider, may access the collected data and determine that one or more actions should be taken with respect to the storage system. Accordingly, the existing ASUP functionality provides a support framework in which reactive action may be taken by support personnel in response to their proactive use of the ASUP support system tool.
The foregoing ASUP functionality, although providing a useful tool for assisting in the monitoring and management of a storage system, can suffer from several disadvantages. For example, the relatively simple call-home messaging implementation of such ASUP architectures can result in message flooding (e.g., essentially provide a denial of service attack on the ASUP back-end system when certain anomalies associated with a monitored event persist (e.g., a monitored event is repeatedly detected until action is taken to correct the anomaly). Moreover, the sheer volume of data collected by the ASUP back-end system (e.g., ASUP records including complete logs, events, and counter information from every ASUP-enabled field system) presents challenges with respect to support personnel parsing through the data to identify actual operational problems and failures, particularly where a large number of benign event messages are produced. Even where it is determined that one or more actions should be taken with respect to the storage system, current ASUP functionality does not itself enable taking responsive action. This is generally so for at least two reasons. Separate tools, such as the aforementioned management applications, provide the only interface for initiating change within the storage system. Moreover, security and other operational concerns usually mandate that changes to the storage system be tightly controlled. Thus, allowing back-end initiated manipulation of the storage system or components thereof, without being at the direction or under control of the front-end system, is generally not acceptable to the users or operators of the storage system. Accordingly, back-end support personnel must typically work with front-end management personnel in order to direct the manipulation of system changes, such as through storage administrator use of a management application, where it is determined that one or more actions should be taken with respect to the storage system.